Argonne National Laboratory

Experimental Physics and
Industrial Control System

1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019  Index 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: Re: Controls & Physics
From: Korhonen Timo <Timo.Korhonen@psi.ch>
To: Michele Joyce <erb@jlab.org>
Cc: "tech-talk@aps.anl.gov" <tech-talk@aps.anl.gov>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2010 13:27:26 +0100
Hi Michele,

Michele Joyce wrote:
Timo,
I'm very interested in learning how you do this. Do you have a separate server calculating the optics parameters and sticking them in the EPICS records? Or do you build the calculations into the records of individual devices?
The calculations are put into a layer of EPICS records that uses the hardware layer records as inputs and outputs.
Basically we work(ed) together with the physicists and translate(d) some of the most used applications into epics
templates; those have then bunches of calcout records for the formulas and other stuff to distribute/concentrate the values
as needed. One can achieve quite neat results with epics records....
Once this is done, the physics parameters are available for all applications. For changing the parameters you then need
just a simple screen - medm panel for instance.
Of course, all this can also be done using a server. I think however that the implementation in the records has paid off.


If you want more details, I need to point you to my colleagues who can explain them better. I have personally done
only very little in this - but I really love the idea.


best regards,

Timo



Michele

Korhonen Timo wrote:
Steiner, Mathias wrote:
My question is this: To what extent are the physics parameters part of the controls? Should there be channels like "Separator:BeamMass," for example?
My feeling is that the beam, as it were, should be part of the control system from the beginning, but I don't have much to back this up.
What do you think?
To me and my colleagues (most of them, at least) here this has never even been a question but an obvious thing.
We have (in SLS) all kinds of physics parameters as epics channels (tune, chromacity, etc. for the synchrotron
and, for instance photon energy and polarization for the beamlines.) This brings so many advantages
that I cannot even count...
Of course, you then have to have people in controls that look after and understand these issues. This
in turn makes the communication between different groups much easier. Bob also pointed this out.


So, my 2 cents go for a big yes.

best regards,

Timo



--
Timo Korhonen PSI (Paul Scherrer Institut, http://www.psi.ch) CH-5232 Villigen PSI tel + 41- 56 3103262 fax + 41 - 56 310 5090 e-mail: timo.korhonen@psi.ch



Replies:
Re: Controls & Physics Steven M. Hartman
References:
Controls & Physics Steiner, Mathias
Re: Controls & Physics Korhonen Timo
Re: Controls & Physics Michele Joyce

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Re: Controls & Physics Michele Joyce
Next: Re: Controls & Physics Steven M. Hartman
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: Re: Controls & Physics Michele Joyce
Next: Re: Controls & Physics Steven M. Hartman
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  <20102011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  2018  2019 
ANJ, 02 Sep 2010 Valid HTML 4.01! · Home · News · About · Base · Modules · Extensions · Distributions · Download ·
· Search · EPICS V4 · IRMIS · Talk · Bugs · Documents · Links · Licensing ·